Sydney FC commit seppuku over Brosque?

New twist see's S Pulse getting FIFA involved in Okazaki's transfer to Stuttgart. S Pulse claim Stuttgart signed him without their agreement.

Well I obviously don't know as much as the esteemed Matsusan, but it all still seems a bit off to me. Brosque signed a contract to play with Sydney from April 1st for 3 years. Eiether it was a completeley new contract that needs to be honoured come 1st of April, or the panel decided that it was just an extension of his exsisting contract which still had a buyout clause effective until 1st of April. If this is the case then Alex was contracted for another 3 years and the club are perfectly entitled to expect negotiations to go through them.

I think normally, the new contract would make the normal contract null and void However I got a feeling that Sydney FC didn't t do this due to salary cap reason Therefore they have to wait until the end of the season before the pay rise for Brosque takes effects to ensure that his salary fits within the cap (I'm assuming that sydney were planning to offload a few players at the end of the season to ensure that Brosque fits inside the cap). Hence the buyout clause is still relevant until the end of the initial contract

Well please tell us Matsu, you seem to know everything. From your above argument I gather that an "unofficial" go between was asked by the club to ask Alex if he wants $1.5 million and when he said yes the club approached Sydney FC. This was all perfectly legit and FIFA just has the rule there as a general guideline. Sydney said no we have Alex contracted for 3 years and we don't want to sell him and Shimizu said what about his buyout clause, Sydney said how did you know about that and Shimizu said, a little birdy told us. Its all so simple in your world isn't it Matsu.

Somebody give this guy a link to some website on contract law. Im tired of trying to get through to him, and concerned that Im going to say something unpleasant.

I don't think the new contract was invalid, I think they just decided that the get out clause had to be honoured, but when Alex signed the new contract he was effectively contracted for another 3 and a half years. This ruling has done nothing to settle that matter. "you just create a bad impression of Australians in general" Well you being arrogant and patronising does the same for us Aussies, but I guess you don't need to worry about our opinion, we're just dishonourable criminals living in a big desert, not nearly as important as you lot.

Oh fercryingoutloud. Do you STILL not get it? The three year contract was not a valid document until April 1st. A big group of highly paid lawyers, including several paid by SydneyFC, just got done deciding that point. The fact that nobody has offered ANY proof whatsoever that an S-Pulse rep ever met Brosque isnt even pertinent - unless of course someone should get pissed off enough to sue Scott Barlow for libel. Why cant you just accept that decision graciously? By trying to revive an argument thats already been settled, you just create a bad impression of Australians in general, for another Asian observer.

What? OK, just remember the etiquette of approaching the club first when a player has a 3 year contract and I think we can all get along.

Youre right on that. But not everybody WANTS a big empty desert and a bunch of funny-looking animalz (^c,~)

You don't seem to understand. You can't buy what we've got.

Ouch. With that attitude youd better watch out. Qatar has more than enough money to buy the team that knocks you out of the 2014 WC qualifiers (^c,~)

Whatever, Australia still outplayed Japan and on 1/100th of the budget.

Well, that settles that. To those of you who gave me a big "warm welcome" with all your talk about "a contract is a contract", lets just hope you learned something from the discussion. Better yet, lets hope Mr. Barlow has learned something. If this is how he runs the club, I cant feel anything except pity for you poor Sydney FC fans . . . . TA

you can read it all here http://theworldgame.sbs.com.au/news/1042705/Brosque-free-to-join-Shimizu Brosque - ”I am playing under my old contract which expires on March 1 and by agreeing to the buyout clause Sydney effectively agreed that all future contracts become null and void (in terms of the clause). ”It is a relief because it had started to drag on a little bit and it got to a position where nobody wanted to be in.

Apparently Brosque is on his way to S pulse now with arbitration finding in his favor.

"Actually Matsu your the one who says S-Pulse claimed they talked to the player before his new contract was signed, I merely pointed out it was signed well before the last 6 months of the existing contract. So has the club effectively implicated itself if what you say was correct." No SM, "Actually" what I said was that S-Pulse MIGHT have talked to him at a time when he was WITHIN six months of the end of a VALID CONTRACT. Not only would this be true if the buyout clause was in force until April 1, but it would also be true if S-Pulse never talked to him at all. Im sorry if my comments confused you, and I admit I may not have stated the comment clearly, but the truth is Im just seeking information. Im not trying to provide it, nor am I speaking on S-Pulse's behalf. I think that you (and a few others) have gotten into an improper mindset based on what you perceive as "my agenda". . . . Now that it is clear that Mr. Barlow was the person who made the claim and the threat, it puts a very new spin on things. At the moment, all I can say for sure is this - Everything that I have been able to verify, up to now, tells me that S-Pulse WOULD not have done what Mr. Barlow claims they did (because they have nothing to gain and no history of unscrupulous behaviour), and that they probably COULD not have done what he claims (because Im pretty close to confirming the whereabouts of everyone who could have legally spoken on the club's behalf). What all of you need to get through your heads (and apparently Mr Barlow does as well) is that in football, unofficial "go betweens" OFTEN speak to players, agents and club representatives to gauge interest and expectations before a formal approach is ever made. This happens hundreds (if not thousands) of times every day, and indeed, is the reason why rumours about player transfers - those stories you see popping up all over the pages of sport magazines worldwide - get started in the first place. Im assuming that the club management is intelligent enough to know how these things are done and how negotiations are handled. But the owner of the club might not be as well informed. If Mr. Barlow heard a rumour that Alex met some unidentified "Japanese person" in December, and used that as the basis for making an allegation of "tapping up", then he is not only guilty of libel. With my blonde hair and blue eyes, I could have met Alex Brosque in a coffee shop and asked it he had an interest in playing in Japan, and nobody would have known that I was "Japanese" (which I am). So far I have no indication that there were ANY employees of Eslap Communications (the company that operates SPulse) in Sydney in mid-December. But Im sure there were plenty of people who look "Japanese", and who might have met Alex Brosque, entirely legally, and discussed his future plans. One reason Im so eager to contact Mike Tuckerman is that he knows S-Pulse quite well, and might have a clue as to who (if anyone) might have played a middleman role. I think its time to put this message thread to bed, and wait until more details emerge. If this turns out to be just a case of a clueless owner shooting off his mouth in an inappropriate way, I hope he has the dignity to apologise to S-Pulse once its all over. But we wont know until everyone has had their say and it becomes a matter of public record. Anyone who can provide me with ACTUAL INFORMATION on this issue, and help me to make those details public, can contact me by e-mail. kenmatsushima@the-rising-sun-news.com

Actually Matsu your the one who says S-Pulse claimed they talked to the player before his new contract was signed, I merely pointed out it was signed well before the last 6 months of the existing contract. So has the club effectively implicated itself if what you say was correct. Brosque was given permission by the club to seek a loan spell at a club at a high enough level so he could get match practice in order to be in the window for selection for the World cup 2010 from March last year after the A_league season ended, but Brosque found no club to take him up. The irony of all this is S-Pulse had they been willing at the time could have given him a try before you buy spell with no transfer fee. In fact I can't work out why Brosque had such difficulty finding a club, but other Australian players had similiar problems and had to resort to training with overseas clubs. Maybe it was because they were not prepared to take pay cuts from their A-league wages to ensure they played at all costs, because I can't see a club refusing a quality player who was willing to play on the cheap, or for world cup selection they should have been prepared to play for nothing. The reason Sydney FC have the unusual situation of two contracts is because of the salary cap prevents them from raising the wage during the current season. Having two contracts with the same club makes the situation different from normal, however the situation that a player signs with a new club while playing for an existing one is not unique, and it seems blatantly obvious that if the they can;t break the contract with a new club how did Brosque and his agent assumed he could break his new contract just because it was signed with the original club. You also have to distinguish between the management of the club and the owners in the case of Sydney FC. The management of the club might have been willing to let Brosque go, but the owners who are represented by Scott Barlow are the ones who seem to have intervened.

Meyer was a bit rusty at the start but he did really well today. Looks like a good defensive midfielder, paired up with Paartalu quite well. And another goal! 4 from 3 games.

ABC Online is the Federal Governments news service, it has a much better repuation than Sportal, the Daily telegraph and Bigpond sport. That said all they are doing is passing on what Sydney Fc have alleged.

Shannon, I dont see any need to get into a slanging match. I would like to point out, however, that Ive tried to be as open as possible to any information provided, and have repeatedly made comments to make it clear that I had no presumptions or preconceived notions. By contrast, everyone who has responded seems to have clearly preconceived notions that are, quite simply, baseless. Ive beern approaching this story with as open a mind as possible, and trying to figure out what is going on, but to be quite honest, nothing that the Australian side (either Sydney OR Brosque) really makes much sense. Let me try to sketch out what I DO know, as closely as possible. - S-Pulse already have one Australian player on the team. They therefore would have nothing to gain in singing another, which would offer any advantage over buying a generic Brazilian for maybe a quarter the price of what Brosque is expected to get. Moreover their new coach who just took over is Afsin Ghotbi, the Iranian NT coach at the Asian Cup, who surely would be able to locate a talented young Iranian (who it stands to reason, would also be cheaper). Please note Im only pointing this out to establish that S-Pulse doenst have any compelling MOTIVE to try to "cheat Sydney FC". As far as I can tell, the reason the club pursued Brosque was that Eddy Bosnar recommended that they do so (I also suspect that the club may have asked Mike T. what he thought about Brousque, since he has contacts to S-Pulse) - S-Pulse scouting staff consists of just 3 people. I can confirm that none of them have been in Australia in the last 3 months. The guy who would have to sign off on any such player acquisition activities, Tatsuya Mochizuki, was in Japan for the entire month of December. So if this "approach" Sydney claims happened in early December did happen, it was not an formal S-Pulse representative with the power and authority to discuss contract terms. That isnt to say it is "impossible" that "someone" might have met Brosque. It simply causes me to wonder who could be the "tapper", and how Sydney got information that they met. - In early January S-Pulse informed Sydney that he wanted to discuss a transfer and Sydney agreed. An initial offer was faxed to the club and they said it was less than they preferred but it was worth negotiating over, so a representative of S-Pulse flew to Australia. - Some time in the week of Jan 15 the three parties (including Brosque) met and S-Pulse made a second offer. As far as I can **verify** this was the first time that Brosque was told S-Pulse wanted to offer him A$1.4 for two seasons http://www.sportal.com.au/football-news-display/brosque-on-way-out-108885 - Though Brosque was happy with the offer, Sydney rejected the proposed transfer amount, which was reportedly A$300,000 ($50,000 more than his buyout clause amount). The S-Pulse representative asked if he could contact the club and discuss how high he could go with an offer. - On the 20th of January the parties met again, and this time S-Pulse (reportedly) offered twice Brosque's buyout clause amount, or roughly A$500,000. Sydney said they would think about it, and after the meeting someone (possibly Brosque or his agent) informed the press http://www.bigpondsport.com/brosque-set-to-leave-sydney-for-japan/tabid/91/newsid/66436/default.aspx - On January 24, Sydney suddenly issued a press release (apparently, though I cannot yet confirm it, without first informing S-Pulse). In the press release the club said that they were rejecting the offer. They said nothing about any disputes, and didnt mention any questions about "tapping up". http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/alex-brosque-blasts-sydney-fc-for-japan-snub/story-fn6bmf6t-1225994506691 - As the same story linked above tells, Brosque got upsetand on Jan 25, made his "they interfered with my life and future" complaint. Note that up to this point, the two clubs had been in contact, and negotiating in APPARENT good faith for nearly two weeks, and yet there had been no suggestion that anything was wrong, or that Sydney was unhappy with the contact. Indeed it was Sydney who suggested that S-Pulse send a person to Australia to negotiate. - On the evening of January 25 an AAP reporter filed a story that quoted ***One, unnamed individual**** from Sydney FC as stating that the club was going to complain about S-Pulse to FIFA. As far as I can tell, the story ran on only that one wire service, was not corroborated by the club, and nobody has repeated the claim or the threat since that one story. http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2011/01/25/3121727.htm?site=sport&section=football - You will note that this same story - from only one source, and not repeated or confirmed by either the club or any other news organisation since that time - also claims that "it has been confirmed to the Sky Blues that representatives of the Japanese club spent time in Sydney several weeks ago where they held discussions with the player." Unfortunately, there is no indication that any S-Pulse personnel were in Australia "several weeks ago" (ie. mid December). On the contrary, everything I have been able to locate from Japanese sources suggest that they were all in Japan, since S-Pulse was still taking part in the Emperor's Cup at the time, and since the Nationwide High School tournament was about to begin (and that would have been the main focus for any player development personnel). As I said above, I know for a fact that Tatsuya Mochizuki(who is the ONLY person who could have authorized such a discussion) was in Japan. Thats where I am with the story right now. As I said earlier and Ill say again, there is NO CONCRETE EVIDENCE AT ALL that S-Pulse did anything wrong. And if anyone deserves to be criticised for making "baseless accusations" its the people who have posted on this thread making comments that are predicated on the truth of a statement that was only published once, in a newspaper Ive never heard of before (ABC Online), and which quotes an unnamed source whose comments Sydney has not repeated or confirmed. So . . . as I said before Im sorry for wasting everyones time. I just wanted to make sure the accusations levelled at me in the post above are not left unchallenged. Thanks.